:worship: :p :worship: :p :worship: :p :worship:
###
>>>>>>>>>> IF you had to pick a pair of Slams to win in a year which combination would you pick:confused:

1. FO & USO ~ ruled out because it`s the obvious pick;)
2. Wimby & USO ~ ruled out because McEnroe, Connors, Becker, Sampras, Federer have made this combo look easy:eek:
3. AO & FO ~ ruled out because Jim Courier managed the feat:p
4. AO & FO ~ ruled out because both are hard courts [though maybe I should include it for Newcombe`s sake~?]
...........
THEREFORE:
AO & Wimby [Sampras 94, 97]...or...FO & USO [Agassi 99, Vilas 77]..
Which combination do you think is more meaningful in this era???

its.like.that

10-10-2006, 07:18 AM

what about AO and USO, or FO and Wimby?

its.like.that

10-10-2006, 07:19 AM

The AO and FO are the two most heavily contested slams, so it would have to be them.

Action Jackson

10-10-2006, 07:20 AM

AO and FO

CmonAussie

10-10-2006, 07:22 AM

what about AO and USO, or FO and Wimby?
:wavey: ~~I thought that in this era with both AO & USO being on hard courts that it`s not as meaningful as winning two slams in a calendar year on different surfaces:cool: .... I was just trying keep it simple also;)

CmonAussie

10-10-2006, 07:23 AM

AO and FO
:cool:
I guess Jim Courier`s legacy just went up a notch then:confused:

CmonAussie

10-10-2006, 07:25 AM

what about AO and USO, or FO and Wimby?
FO & Wimby is the obvious pick~~ I`m sure that`s what Nadal was aiming at->> to equal the seemingly impossible task that Borg achieved back in his heyday:devil:

Action Jackson

10-10-2006, 07:26 AM

:cool:
I guess Jim Courier`s legacy just went up a notch then:confused:

Here is my honest opinion on this. I don't care about Courier's legacy, Wilander has achieved that, it's not like it hasn't happened before.

Personally I don't give a crap about it, if someone wins a Slam, then good for them and they have deserved it and some mean more to different people and players than others, in spite of the rubbish hoopla you hear that everyone wants to Wimbledon, it's not true.

CmonAussie

10-10-2006, 07:29 AM

Here is my honest opinion on this. I don't care about Courier's legacy, Wilander has achieved that, it's not like it hasn't happened before.

Personally I don't give a crap about it, if someone wins a Slam, then good for them and they have deserved it and some mean more to different people and players than others, in spite of the rubbish hoopla you hear that everyone wants to Wimbledon, it's not true.
:cool:
George your personality reminds me of Courier;) . He also never suffered fools:o .... Seriously thanks for your two bob:angel:

Action Jackson

10-10-2006, 07:29 AM

:cool:
George your personality reminds me of Courier;) . He also never suffered fools:o .... Seriously thanks for your two bob:angel:

I am from being like Courier.

CmonAussie

10-10-2006, 07:31 AM

I am from being like Courier.
:confused:
You don`t like Courier??? It wasn`t meant as an insult;)

CmonAussie

10-10-2006, 07:35 AM

The AO and FO are the two most heavily contested slams, so it would have to be them.
:worship:
Its.like.that mate ~ are you an Aussie battler like me:angel:
### My heart started racing when I saw your Avatar:D ~~ Scarlett Johannson is absolutely heavenly:angel:

Action Jackson

10-10-2006, 07:37 AM

:confused:
You don`t like Courier??? It wasn`t meant as an insult;)

No, I don't like Courier much, but it was an observation that I didn't agree with.

its.like.that

10-10-2006, 07:37 AM

:wavey: ~~I thought that in this era with both AO & USO being on hard courts that it`s not as meaningful as winning two slams in a calendar year on different surfaces:cool: .... I was just trying keep it simple also;)

Well there are 4 slams, making 6 possible combinations when you pick two of them.

If you don't include them all in your survey, then the answer are useless.

As for the toughest cominbation of winning two slams, given the proximity in time of the FO and Wimby and the vast difference in court speed - then this is your answer.

CmonAussie

10-10-2006, 07:41 AM

No, I don't like Courier much, but it was an observation that I didn't agree with.

Apologies are in order then><:sad: ~~ just curious why you don`t like Courier:confused:

It's obvious really that RG and Wimb in the same year is the best one, the fact that it has the greatest surface differential and least time in between them, then the player who does that, definitely has something to be proud of.

its.like.that

10-10-2006, 07:45 AM

Apologies are in order then><:sad: ~~ just curious why you don`t like Courier:confused:

Courier pushed in front of George in the queue at the Heineken beer garden a couple years back.

George has hated him ever since.

its.like.that

10-10-2006, 07:47 AM

It's obvious really that RG and Wimb in the same year is the best one, the fact that it has the greatest surface differential and least time in between them, then the player who does that, definitely has something to be proud of.

I dare say that a player who wins any slam has something to be proud of.

:p

Action Jackson

10-10-2006, 07:51 AM

I dare say that a player who wins any slam has something to be proud of.

:p

Too true.

Boris Franz Ecker

10-10-2006, 08:09 AM

Wimbledon + US Open is best, then Wimbledon+French Open.
Everybody should know that French Open/Australian Open were only pseudo slams in the 70ies.
Therefore a French Open/Australian double has no tradition, no history.
Everything in relation with Australian Open has no tradition except for the Grand Slam.

Not to forget this FO & US Open "double" doesn't exist.
Nonsense, to think it's more difficult, it's simply a non-existent thing.
And of course... Australian Open+X... a non-existent thing in tennis history.

its.like.that

10-10-2006, 08:13 AM

Wimbledon + US Open is best, then Wimbledon+French Open.
Everybody should know that French Open/Australian Open were only pseudo slams in the 70ies.
Therefore a French Open/Australian double has no tradition, no history.
Everything in relation with Australian Open has no tradition except for the Grand Slam.